4 International Thomas built School buses for AT TNT Auto sales for $2495 each. in Central Virginia. All have Turbo 6.0l diesel engines. Heres the contact info 540 832 2886. or the web athttp://www.tntbang.com/contact.htm

one thing i don't get though is ford going with a DOHC setup. that ain't cheap with a V-8. and why go to the extra expense on something that will probably never see the high side of 4000 rpm? is there any other advantage than high rev capability in an OHC setup? Can't be 4 valve capability as cummins has figured that out with pushrods.

i really don't see why anyone would build anything other than an inline 6 for large diesel engines. engine length isn't a concern, I don't think.

ford had such serious issues with the 6.0 liter (which is a navistar/international motor) that they stopped putting it in trucks within about 2 years of when they first started making the engine. I worked for an ambulance company and we got a few F450's with 6.0 liters. Within the first year we had all of the trucks back to the dealership several times. I think all 3 have gotten new heads, new turbo's, new injectors on more than 1 occasion, 1 motor was finally replaced after it detonated, had at least 1 fan clutch freeze up, head gaskets on at least one, etc etc.

and the ambulance edition 6.0 liter gets like 100 hp and 100 ft/lb of torque LESS than the pickup trucks.

when they run they're great motors. Too bad the days of 460 ci port fuel injected gas engine ambulances are gone.

Michigan is very friendly to auto makers when it comes to lemon laws. Other states are not as friendly. Ford bought back hundreds of pickup trucks with 6.0 liter engines due to lemon laws. It was a seriously flawed engine.

The new 6.4? liter ford diesel is built by ford. Twin turbo's v8 brand new design.......ugggggg!

I don't get it either. V-8s are great for gas engines in cars where packaging is an issue. Trucks have plenty of room under the hood and you can make the damn thing as big as you want without vibration concerns due to it's inherent balancing.

Notice that the cummins 6 is real popular, particularly in the used market. You can find plenty of old powerstrokes out there for cheap. Can't say the same for the dodges.

I w2ould hate to need a ride in one of those ambulances. Might breakdown before they get me to the hospital.

__________________
"Escapin' through the lily fields
I came across an empty space
It trembled and exploded
Left a bus stop in its place
The bus came by and I got on
That's when it all began
There was cowboy Neal
At the wheel
Of a bus to never-ever land"

The new 6.4 diesel is still made by Navistar. It is the MaxxForce 7 in Navistar speak with the MaxxForce 5 being the new V-6 Ford keeps talking about putting in the half tons. I've already heard of some problems with it, but that's inherent to any new engine design. Just ask Toyota with their snapping camshafts in the 3UR-FE Tundra motor.

I have to agree, Pete. What is the point of a DOHC V-8 diesel? If you look at the dyno graphs you will see that while the Powerstroke matches the competition in torque and horsepower output for the most part it does so at a much higher RPM.

Is it to give guys that seat of the pants kick? Is it to make it more able to crank out bragging rights horsepower? I'm not sure. It really doesn't make for a working truck engine though.

The problems now with ALL the makes are generally electronics related. Yes, a blown head gasket certainly is a mechanical issue, but what caused it to blow? Was it a faulty boost regulator on the variable turbocharger? Was it the computer overleaning or overenrichening the mixture? Was it the whole host of emissions stuff? It really is hard to say and hard to track down the problem.

We are fortunate in that our buses are all mechanical for the most part. I can't think of anyone on the site that has an electronic engine other than MAYBE someone floating around with a T444E. Our mechanical diesels (the 6.6 Brazilian included, Chuck. ) are stupidly simple and very reliable. The emissions aren't as low, the mileage not as high, and the output (stock anyway) not as high per cubic inch as the more modern diesels, but they hold together for hundreds of thousands of miles.

I'm not going to say that electronics are bad. They really are the wave of the future, but there is a learning curve that must be dealt with. The current horsepower and torque wars in the diesel market are great in that the industry is getting a great influx of R&D money and we are seeing better and better things. But what about reliability? I have a hard time believing that Ford did what I would consider sufficient testing of the 6.4 based on the fact that the 6.0 was released just two years prior. Their energies were going into designing that and then designing the fixes. Were they really working on the 6.0's replacement before it was even released? I highly doubt it.

We as consumers have become a testing grounds for the automanufacturers. It is easier for them to swallow a few engines than it is to release a truly reliable product. There is also a lack of governement support for the consumer. Sure, we have lemon laws and recall laws, but the companies can get around that.

I could go on for a long time bitching and moaning, but this whole thread was about some buses that are for sale with an engine of unknown origin. Meanwhile the rest of us are fortunate enough to have time tested powerplants in our rigs.

Ford's have electrical problems? Tell that the to Chevy 4L60E transmission that is giving me hell at school. It has some angry circuits...somewhere in there...amongst the 4 miles of wiring...covered in transmission fluid... I'm thinking I could wedge an AT545 in this Blazer with a 3 inch body lift and some gentle hammering...a W-code 4.3 PCM for a manual tranny Blazer and I would be set.

Well...after looking at the FSM powerflow chart for that tranny it really seems unlikely to be a mechanical failure for the most part. Using a GM Tech II scan tool I found that the VCM thinks that everything is gravy inside the tranny.

So what does it do?

Selector in 4th=
3rd gear starts, shifts to 4th and locks up TCC correctly, all PWM functions (just the pressure regulating solenoid for the TCC really) normal and within spec

Selector in 3rd=
2nd gear starts, shifts through to 4th and locks up TCC correctly, all PWM functions normal and within spec

Line pressure is all within spec at idle (I need to hook the scan tool up and check pressure control solenoid current draw at charted RPM's still) except in manual low. Of course if it isn't in 2nd electronically...

So...my first thought would have been that I needed to drop the pan and just replace the A (1-2) solenoid. I'd do the B (2-3) solenoid as long as I was in there too.

However, if the A solenoid (the one that controls 1st) were out it should have set a DTC and 4th gear should not be available in theory. The computer also shouldn't show that A solenoid actuation has been commanded.

The FSM says that the solenoids are required for all shifts except the 3-4 shift which can be done completely hydraulically.

Hmmm....the A solenoid is on in both 1st and 4th while the B solenoid controls 2-3 (default mode).

My theory: The A solenoid is being commanded and electronically is doing what it is supposed to by grounding via the drivers in the computer. However, mechanically it is leaking pressure down. The computer can't tell the difference. It will still shift into 4th because hydraulics override the electronics. The TCC circuit will never know the difference. The only other option I see being that both manual low and breakaway low don't work is that the seals on the low gear accumulator are shot. Solenoids or accumulator seals...I can get to both from the pan which is nice. If it's something else the thing is getting a junkyard tranny I think unless the owner of the vehicle (one of my employers, actually) wishes to pay me for a complete rebuild of the tranny.